• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sky Warden

How can I avoid circular dependency?

7 posts in this topic

I often meet a condition in programming where I have a class which takes an instance of another class and makes use of some functions in that imported class, while that class also needs some functions in the first class.

 

Like class A has function x() and y(), and class B has function i() and j(). Class A needs to use function i() in class B, and function j() in class B needs to use function y() in class A.

 

How can I reduce this to minimum? Is there any better way to do this? For some reasons, function y is only available in class A.

 

Oh, almost forgot this question. How can I do this the right way?

 

Thank you everyone.

Edited by Sky Warden
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my first thought is that since the two classes seem to need each other so closely - and are apparently unable to function without each other - surely they should be merged somehow? In most designs classes do not interact mutually but only in one direction, but I suppose there are situations where you can end up with circular dependencies.

 

What is your exact situation?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my first thought is that since the two classes seem to need each other so closely - and are apparently unable to function without each other - surely they should be merged somehow? In most designs classes do not interact mutually but only in one direction, but I suppose there are situations where you can end up with circular dependencies.

 

What is your exact situation?

Thanks for the reply, Bacterius.

 

So there's a protocol class which has a function to write data to the socket. This protocol class needs a function from another class and it sends some data to the said class. Still in one direction, right. Then this another class has a function which process the data sent by the protocol, and after processing the data it needs to write data to the socket. This is where things go circular.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really got you point. As @Bacterius said, you can easily merge A and B.
Another way, you can define a pure virtual base class X which has function x(), y(), i(), j(). So that A or B inherit from X, so they can used them without any trouble. all right?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really got you point. As @Bacterius said, you can easily merge A and B.
Another way, you can define a pure virtual base class X which has function x(), y(), i(), j(). So that A or B inherit from X, so they can used them without any trouble. all right?

How about I make a subclass of the protocol class so I can inherit the write function? Is it a bad idea? Merging both function may make some of my things to work nastily, so I won't do that unless I can find another way.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to your situation, why do you seperate those function base on their responsibility. I would like to define the protocolClass as a virtual class so that it could provide a processData() method, it no need to worry about the write and send function. SocketBuffer will take care of that. 

class ProtocolClass{

  SocketBuffer processData() =0;  // process the data by the protocol

}

 

//SocketBuffer defines thoes write and read functions.

class SocketBuffer{

   void send(SocketBuffer *said) = 0;

    void write(SocketBuffer *target) = 0;

}

 

class testClass: public ProtocolClass, public SocketBuffer{

    // to-do

 

}

 

does it meet your need?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to your situation, why do you seperate those function base on their responsibility. I would like to define the protocolClass as a virtual class so that it could provide a processData() method, it no need to worry about the write and send function. SocketBuffer will take care of that.

 

Actually I've solved this by subclass-ing the protocol class. The subclass inherits all of the functions the protocol class provides, and I can define the service specific functions in that subclass to make everything neat and stuff. :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not have the other class return the data it wants to send to the socket. Then your protocol class can do its job and send it to the socket without the other class know how its being sent?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0